Tomsic 1995

Performance		0-Rank	0-Score	1-Rank	1-Score	2-Rank	2-Score	3-Rank	3-Score	3R-Rank	3R-Score	4-Rank	4-Score	NED
Afanassiev 2001		17	0.35	8	0.02	10	0.14	9	0.48	15	0.52	9	0.50
Anderszewski 2003		63	0.22	2	0.19	2	0.19	20	0.31	23	0.45	16	0.37
Ashkenazy 1981		10	0.40	40	0.00	17	0.09	16	0.36	43	0.15	29	0.23
Bacha 2000		32	0.31	20	0.01	48	0.05	60	0.05	28	0.30	52	0.12
Badura 1965		47	0.26	19	0.01	35	0.08	35	0.16	28	0.41	24	0.26
Barbosa 1983		69	0.21	26	0.00	58	0.05	55	0.05	67	0.05	65	0.05
Biret 1990		51	0.25	32	0.00	47	0.06	46	0.06	34	0.40	41	0.15
Blet 2003		19	0.34	88	0.00	15	0.10	13	0.44	31	0.40	12	0.42
Block 1995		25	0.33	64	0.00	23	0.07	17	0.34	37	0.24	20	0.29
Blumental 1952		43	0.28	55	0.00	57	0.06	47	0.06	50	0.06	62	0.06
Boshniakovich 1969		26	0.33	14	0.01	18	0.06	27	0.26	50	0.07	49	0.13
Brailowsky 1960		75	0.18	38	0.00	71	0.04	69	0.04	49	0.08	59	0.06
Bunin 1987		45	0.27	48	0.00	28	0.06	29	0.22	33	0.30	25	0.26
Bunin 1987b		44	0.27	47	0.00	31	0.05	30	0.21	33	0.28	27	0.24
Chiu 1999		73	0.19	89	0.00	79	0.03	78	0.03	75	0.04	83	0.03
Cohen 1997		11	0.39	10	0.02	11	0.16	12	0.45	19	0.52	10	0.48
Cortot 1951		81	0.16	80	0.00	75	0.03	81	0.03	45	0.08	70	0.05
Csalog 1996		80	0.17	72	0.00	84	0.03	76	0.03	68	0.05	80	0.04
Czerny 1949		56	0.24	57	0.00	56	0.06	49	0.06	30	0.53	35	0.18
Czerny 1990		35	0.31	36	0.00	45	0.04	63	0.04	38	0.27	53	0.10
Duchoud 2007		48	0.26	83	0.00	41	0.05	39	0.13	39	0.19	40	0.16
Ezaki 2006		7	0.42	5	0.05	4	0.23	1	0.65	10	0.67	1	0.66
Falvay 1989		3	0.44	3	0.11	3	0.15	2	0.64	3	0.58	2	0.61
Farrell 1958		85	0.13	16	0.01	40	0.04	43	0.10	38	0.19	43	0.14
Ferenczy 1958		83	0.14	46	0.00	70	0.04	67	0.04	38	0.44	47	0.13
Fliere 1977		36	0.30	66	0.00	53	0.04	65	0.04	69	0.04	71	0.04
Fou 1978		37	0.30	67	0.00	55	0.05	54	0.05	68	0.03	75	0.04
Francois 1956		18	0.34	28	0.00	14	0.10	11	0.47	16	0.65	5	0.55
Friedman 1923		82	0.15	81	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	80	0.03	90	0.02
Friedman 1923b		84	0.14	84	0.00	87	0.03	77	0.03	81	0.03	85	0.03
Friedman 1930		41	0.28	17	0.01	60	0.05	56	0.05	55	0.06	66	0.05
Garcia 2007		57	0.24	59	0.00	59	0.05	52	0.05	62	0.05	67	0.05
Garcia 2007b		30	0.32	29	0.00	32	0.07	32	0.20	27	0.43	21	0.29
Gierzod 1998		66	0.22	43	0.00	33	0.06	31	0.21	31	0.36	22	0.27
Gornostaeva 1994		49	0.25	60	0.00	63	0.05	53	0.05	42	0.18	56	0.09
Groot 1988		1	0.47	1	0.30	1	0.29	5	0.58	17	0.50	6	0.54
Harasiewicz 1955		15	0.35	12	0.01	24	0.07	21	0.31	39	0.16	30	0.22
Hatto 1993		5	0.43	9	0.02	6	0.14	6	0.56	20	0.52	7	0.54
Hatto 1997		6	0.43	18	0.01	9	0.20	4	0.59	9	0.53	4	0.56
Horowitz 1949		65	0.22	61	0.00	80	0.03	75	0.03	59	0.05	77	0.04
Indjic 1988		2	0.46	4	0.05	5	0.22	3	0.60	19	0.57	3	0.58
Kapell 1951		50	0.25	85	0.00	49	0.05	59	0.05	46	0.08	61	0.06
Kissin 1993		33	0.31	33	0.00	39	0.05	38	0.13	39	0.30	31	0.20
Kushner 1989		13	0.38	70	0.00	25	0.07	24	0.29	38	0.21	26	0.25
Luisada 1991		12	0.39	7	0.03	8	0.16	7	0.55	23	0.51	8	0.53
Lushtak 2004		68	0.21	62	0.00	34	0.05	36	0.15	28	0.21	36	0.18
Malcuzynski 1961		14	0.38	24	0.00	19	0.08	15	0.40	26	0.31	17	0.35
Magaloff 1978		64	0.22	49	0.00	78	0.03	82	0.03	72	0.04	84	0.03
Magin 1975		34	0.31	45	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.10	36	0.31	34	0.18
Michalowski 1933		62	0.23	39	0.00	73	0.03	83	0.03	70	0.05	79	0.04
Milkina 1970		61	0.23	68	0.00	46	0.05	51	0.05	31	0.34	46	0.13
Mohovich 1999		46	0.27	41	0.00	36	0.09	34	0.18	41	0.18	37	0.18
Moravec 1969		24	0.33	27	0.00	43	0.04	41	0.10	36	0.19	42	0.14
Morozova 2008		29	0.32	13	0.01	21	0.07	23	0.30	41	0.13	33	0.20
Neighaus 1950		4	0.44	11	0.01	7	0.17	8	0.55	19	0.41	11	0.47
Niedzielski 1931		67	0.21	73	0.00	76	0.03	79	0.03	63	0.05	74	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		53	0.25	44	0.00	64	0.05	61	0.05	81	0.03	78	0.04
Osinska 1989		71	0.20	86	0.00	77	0.02	85	0.02	57	0.05	82	0.03
Pachmann 1927		58	0.23	87	0.00	69	0.04	73	0.04	54	0.07	64	0.05
Paderewski 1930		27	0.32	54	0.00	27	0.06	28	0.24	30	0.41	18	0.31
Perlemuter 1992		40	0.28	15	0.01	52	0.04	68	0.04	44	0.10	58	0.06
Pierdomenico 2008		52	0.25	35	0.00	72	0.02	84	0.02	77	0.03	87	0.02
Poblocka 1999		39	0.29	78	0.00	51	0.04	71	0.04	66	0.05	72	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		60	0.23	31	0.00	62	0.06	45	0.06	35	0.28	45	0.13
Rachmaninoff 1923		78	0.17	42	0.00	61	0.05	58	0.05	61	0.04	73	0.04
Rangell 2001		55	0.24	63	0.00	54	0.06	48	0.06	56	0.05	69	0.05
Richter 1976		20	0.34	23	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.09	46	0.10	54	0.09
Rosen 1989		54	0.25	76	0.00	67	0.05	62	0.05	61	0.04	81	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		77	0.17	79	0.00	81	0.04	66	0.04	53	0.06	68	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		79	0.17	37	0.00	66	0.05	50	0.05	33	0.42	44	0.14
Rosenthal 1931b		70	0.20	71	0.00	65	0.04	72	0.04	32	0.42	51	0.13
Rosenthal 1931c		42	0.28	25	0.00	38	0.04	40	0.12	21	0.49	28	0.24
Rosenthal 1931d		72	0.19	77	0.00	68	0.05	57	0.05	33	0.36	50	0.13
Rossi 2007		89	0.04	56	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	66	0.04	86	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		59	0.23	65	0.00	50	0.04	64	0.04	45	0.10	60	0.06
Rubinstein 1952		22	0.33	6	0.04	12	0.12	14	0.40	27	0.40	14	0.40
Rubinstein 1966		38	0.29	58	0.00	29	0.06	19	0.32	42	0.09	38	0.17
Schilhawsky 1960		86	0.06	74	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	78	0.03	88	0.02
Shebanova 2002		9	0.40	30	0.00	20	0.09	18	0.33	53	0.08	39	0.16
Smith 1975		16	0.35	34	0.00	22	0.06	25	0.29	13	0.59	13	0.41
Sokolov 2002		23	0.33	50	0.00	37	0.05	33	0.19	16	0.45	19	0.29
Sztompka 1959		8	0.41	21	0.01	13	0.10	10	0.47	35	0.33	15	0.39
Tomsic 1995		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Uninsky 1932		31	0.31	53	0.00	30	0.06	37	0.14	58	0.05	57	0.08
Uninsky 1971		28	0.32	69	0.00	26	0.07	26	0.28	42	0.15	32	0.20
Wasowski 1980		21	0.33	22	0.01	16	0.10	22	0.31	42	0.22	23	0.26
Zak 1937		76	0.17	75	0.00	82	0.04	70	0.04	57	0.06	63	0.05
Zak 1951		74	0.19	90	0.00	74	0.03	74	0.03	54	0.05	76	0.04
Random 1		87	0.05	51	0.00	83	0.03	80	0.03	4	0.54	48	0.13
Random 2		88	0.05	52	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	20	0.38	55	0.09
Random 3		90	-0.04	82	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	56	0.03	89	0.02

Column descriptions

• Performance:
• 0-Rank/0-Score: 0-Score is equivalent to Pearson correlation of the entire data sequence between the reference performance and a test performance. 0-Rank is the sorting order of the 0-scores (highest score has a rank of 1).
• 1-Rank/1-Score: 1-Score is the area fraction covered by a particular performance in the scape plot (see image above). These values should not be taken literally, since they are sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
• 2-Rank/2-Score: 2-Score values are equivalent to 1-Score values with all higher-ranking performances removed before the calculation of the area of coverage in the scape is calculated. Improvment over the 1-Rank scores, but still somewhat sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
• 3-Rank/3-Score: Similar to 2-Rank calculations. The bottom 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are kept constant as a noise floor for the similarity measurement. Then one-by-one the top 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are superimposed with the noise-floor performances, and a 3-score is measured as the area covered in the scape. This measure is not sentisive to the Hatto Effect.
• 3R-Rank/3R-Score: Reverse 3-rank/3-scores. 3-rankings and scores are not symmetric (A->B values are different from B->A values). So this column represents similarity measures in the opposite direction.
• 4-Rank/4-Score: The geometric mean between 3-scores and 3R-scores. This column gives the best overall similarity ranking between the various performances (see color codes below).
• NED: Noise Equivalient Distance (not yet implemented)

Color codes for 3-rank listings:

• red = strongly similar performance to target
• orange = moderately similar performance
• yellow = weakly similar performance
• green = marginally similar/dissimilar performance
• white = dissimilar to target
• blue = false positive (has high 3-rank score but low 3R-rank score)

3-rank/scores are not symmetric, so the 3R-rank/score columns give the 3-rank/scores going in the opposite direction. More matches in the 3-rank column than in the 3R-rank column indicates an individualistic performance, while more matches in the 3R-rank column indicates a mainstream performance.

If a 3-rank and a 3R-rank are both marked as similar to each other, then there is a possible direct relation between the performances. If one is similar to the other but not in the reverse direction, then the similarity is more likely to be by chance (performers randomly chose a similar interpretation).